Re: OCR/barcode reliability

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 21:30:15 CDT

At 9:21 PM -0400 6/2/04, David Mertz wrote:
>On Jun 2, 2004, at 8:01 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:
>>Barcodes are also more reliable than OCR.
>
>I find this claim unlikely if we are talking about OCR fonts like
>OCR-A. At the least it is not supportable without some empirical
>evidence. Strong counter-evidence is provided by the banking
>industry, who process literally billions of checks every day, with
>extremely low error rates, using OCR fonts.

Banks use MICR not straight OCR. That's Magnetic Ink. And the MICR
encoding is more redundant that straight OCR is.

Best regards,
Arthur

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:04 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT